England's failure in the war on cancer: lunacy on parade
By Jon Rappoport
"In the long, long run, the medical cartel is Globalism's
most important component. It pacifies populations through poisons called
medicines. And the propaganda wing of the cartel is so successful that
citizens, watching the news at night, seeing men in white coats
descending from a plane into a Third-World country, ready to treat
people suffering from starvation and sewage piped directly into the
drinking water, believe this is a humanitarian mission---as if drugs or
vaccines could cure starvation." (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)
How would you assess these outcomes? The drugs failed to
prolong life for more than a few months. The drugs were highly toxic and
harmed the patients. Prior clinical trials of the drugs showed no
appreciable benefits, but the drugs were released for public use anyway.
World pharmacy news reports a stunning study: "Analysis
of the drugs that were approved for use by the NHS Cancer Drugs Fund
(CDF) in England has shown that the fund was not good value for patients
and society and may have resulted in patients suffering unnecessarily
from toxic side effects of the drugs."
"In a study published in the leading cancer journal Annals of
Oncology, researchers led by Dr Ajay Aggarwal, academic clinical
oncologist at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (UK), and
Professor Richard Sullivan, director of the Institute of Cancer Policy,
King's College London (UK), looked at 29 drugs that had been approved
for use through the CDF in January 2015 for 47 specific cancer
conditions (or indications)."
"Of these [cancer] indications, only 18 (38%) were based on
clinical trials that reported a statistically significant benefit from
the drugs in terms of patients' overall survival; the (median) average
overall survival benefit was 3.2 months, ranging from 1.4 months to 15.7
months."
"When other factors such as quality of life and toxic side
effects of the drugs were considered as part of criteria developed by
oncologists to measure value to patients, the majority of the drugs
failed to show any evidence of meaningful clinical benefit. In fact, the
researchers say the benefit to patients in 'real world' situations was
probably even less than that found in the clinical trials, since
clinical trial participants are carefully selected, have fewer other
health problems and tend to be younger than patients not included in
trials."
The inferences from this great failure are clear. People in
important positions wanted the drugs to be released for public use,
regardless of the fact that they were destined to fail, as evidenced by
prior clinical trials.
Benefits (profits) for the drug companies outweighed any interest in the welfare of the patients.
The researchers in the project had to keep busy doing
something---and if that meant imposing highly toxic drugs on patients,
because useful treatments were not forthcoming from the drug
companies---so be it.
It adds up to reckless disregard, indifference to human life,
and a willingness to torture patients (with the toxic drugs) to squeeze
out a few statistically meaningless "survival" numbers on charts.
Those researchers actively leading and participating in the
British grand experiment could see the handwriting on the wall (failure
to alleviate suffering), but it didn't matter: to them, the patients
weren't humans.
These are the same arrogant "watchdogs" who condemn natural health treatments as dangerous and irresponsible.
No comments:
Post a Comment